The very nature of Qatari mediation between Israel and Hamas would seem to violate not only common sense but also Arab cultural values. Raphael Patai writes in The Arab Mind on the topic of conflict resolution:
It goes without saying that the mediator must be a person whose impartiality is beyond question, and this means that he must not be more closely related to one side in the dispute than to the other...In sum, the ideal mediator is a man who is in a position, because of his personality, status, respect, wealth influence, and so on to create in the litigants the desire to conform with his wishes. (p. 242-243)
Qatar's partiality is beyond question, and in a purely Arab dispute, such a level of partisanship would be cause for rejecting such a mediator. It is from a Western viewpoint that bringing Qatar in, in place of Egypt, might make sense. The idea would be that Qatar, as the sponsor of the Hamas terrorists, would be the one most able to apply pressure on Hamas and wring the necessary concessions.
Not that there has been any indication of Qatar's willingness or ability to do so.
Two weeks ago, Amichai Chikli, Israeli Minister of Diaspora and Combating Antisemitism, posted a deleted tweet from the editor-in-chief of Qatar's Al-Shark:
The full translation of Al-Harmi's post is:
If the heroes of the Qassam Brigades fail to capture Zionist soldiers this time, the second, third, and fourth attempts will succeed, God willing, by adding new rats to the tally already held by the Brigades' heroes. In today's attempt, during a unique operation, the Qassam heroes stormed a newly constructed military site in Rafah and sent a number of Zionist soldiers to hell and a miserable fate. Others were sent to earthly torment with permanent disabilities and impairments, while others were sent to mental and psychological institutions.In Qatar, al-Harmi would not have posted this if he didn't think he had the support of the ruling family or at least that they would not oppose it. But under the circumstances, it did seem odd for the "impartial" mediators to publicly delight in the death of the soldiers on one side of the "dispute." Does Qatar really want this war to end?
It was this incongruity in the acceptance of Qatar's role that was supposed to have been emphasized by Israel's strike. Actually, this is the second strike inside Qatar--the first one being Iran's retaliation against the US military base, Al Udeid Air Base, not far from the attack on Hamas. The discordance of an attack on terrorists living freely in the country that both supports Hamas terrorism and is supposedly negotiating with them should make people uncomfortable with the contradiction.
But Qatar's billions have effectively smoothed that over.
There are many reports on the billions of dollars Qatar spends on furthering its influence and polishing its image. Last year, Bloomberg's annual Qatar Economic Forum in Doha featured Donald Trump Jr., among others. Dow Jones, the parent company of the Wall Street Journal, is planning a WSJ Tech Live event in Qatar in December.
Dow Jones did not reply to questions from The Editors about why it was having an event in a country that Kirchick’s own Wall Street Journal-published piece described as “a theocratic monarchy that is Hamas’s main financial and diplomatic sponsor.” It also didn’t reply to other questions I sent: “Will Israeli companies and businessmen be welcome at the event or will they be banned? Can Dow Jones assure prospective participants that there will be no Hamas terrorist representatives staying at the hotel where the Dow Jones event is taking place? Do you have any concerns about the Qatar-Hamas ties?”What does it take for the US to become uncomfortable with Qatar?
The Israeli strike on Qatar highlights that country's dual role as both a mediator and a financier of Hamas, exposing a deep contradiction in international diplomacy. While the country positions itself as a neutral broker in negotiations, its support for terrorism—and the public celebrations of violence by media under its aegis—reveal that its impartiality is more performative than real. Israel’s strike underscores the uncomfortable truth: a nation cannot credibly mediate a conflict it is actively fueling. Yet billions in influence and strategic partnerships have allowed Qatar to continue this balancing act largely unchecked. For the US and the international community, the question remains: how long can these contradictions go unchallenged before diplomatic convenience gives way to hard reality?
|
"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022) |
 |
Buy